India's Influencers Fear a New Law Could Make them Register with the Government (restofworld.org) 25
Indian influencers
It's the largest country on earth — home to 1.4 billion people. But "The Indian government has plans to classify social media creators as 'digital news broadcasters,'" according to the nonprofit site RestofWorld.org.
While there's "no clarity" on the government's next move, the proposed legislation would require social media creators "to register with the government, set up a content evaluation committee that checks all content before it is published, and appoint complaint handlers — all at their own expense. Any failures in compliance could lead to criminal charges, including jail term." On July 26, the Hindustan Times reported that the government plans to tweak the proposed Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, which aims to combine all regulations for broadcasters under one law. As per a new version of the bill, which has been reviewed by Rest of World, the government defines "digital news broadcaster" as "any person who broadcasts news and current affairs programs through an online paper, news portal, website, social media intermediary, or other similar medium as part of a systematic business, professional or commercial activity."
Creators and digital rights activists believe the potential legislation will tighten the government's grip over online content and threaten the last bastion of press freedom for independent journalists in the country. Over 785 Indian creators have sent a letter to the government seeking more transparency in the process of drafting the bill. Creators have also stormed social media with hashtags like #KillTheBill, and made videos to educate their followers about the proposal.
One YouTube creator told the site that if the government requires them to appoint a "grievance redressal officer," they might simply film themselves, responding to grievances — to "make content out of it".
While there's "no clarity" on the government's next move, the proposed legislation would require social media creators "to register with the government, set up a content evaluation committee that checks all content before it is published, and appoint complaint handlers — all at their own expense. Any failures in compliance could lead to criminal charges, including jail term." On July 26, the Hindustan Times reported that the government plans to tweak the proposed Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, which aims to combine all regulations for broadcasters under one law. As per a new version of the bill, which has been reviewed by Rest of World, the government defines "digital news broadcaster" as "any person who broadcasts news and current affairs programs through an online paper, news portal, website, social media intermediary, or other similar medium as part of a systematic business, professional or commercial activity."
Creators and digital rights activists believe the potential legislation will tighten the government's grip over online content and threaten the last bastion of press freedom for independent journalists in the country. Over 785 Indian creators have sent a letter to the government seeking more transparency in the process of drafting the bill. Creators have also stormed social media with hashtags like #KillTheBill, and made videos to educate their followers about the proposal.
One YouTube creator told the site that if the government requires them to appoint a "grievance redressal officer," they might simply film themselves, responding to grievances — to "make content out of it".
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Left-wing does the same thing too. In fact they do it worse.
Re: (Score:2)
Left-wing does the same thing too. In fact they do it worse.
Authoritarianism is independent of ideology.
Re: (Score:2)
There are some fairly strong left-wing parties at state level, e.g. the Communist Party of India does pretty well in Kerala. But federal politics in India have shifted pretty far to the right.
The plan, is Control. (Score:5, Interesting)
I guess the plan here is to reduce the amount of content from India and reduce the amount of influence India has in the social space? But why would they want to sacrifice that?
This isn’t about what influencers do. This is about control of citizens and public discourse and/or the narrative. “They” might not have a single problem with a current influencer. Not one. But they might have a problem with anyone becoming the “wrong” kind of influencer in the future. These laws intend to prevent that from ever happening, or happening again.
This is about Control. Don’t assume less. You’d be wrong.
Re: (Score:3)
Worth remembering that India was among the first if not the first nation that forced meta to admit that "your chats are encrypted, and meta can't see them" message you get in whatsapp when you start a new chat is a lie.
Because they got meta to censor whatsapp after a few deadly mobbings due to rumors spread in local whatsapp groups in India. Turns out that meta can and does in fact read whatsapp messages when asked by government. And not only read, but proactively censor when asked. Who knew, it's not like
Re: (Score:2)
I guess the plan here is to reduce the amount of content from India and reduce the amount of influence India has in the social space? But why would they want to sacrifice that?
This isn’t about what influencers do. This is about control of citizens and public discourse and/or the narrative. “They” might not have a single problem with a current influencer. Not one. But they might have a problem with anyone becoming the “wrong” kind of influencer in the future. These laws intend to prevent that from ever happening, or happening again.
This is about Control. Don’t assume less. You’d be wrong.
Also tax.
And bribery.
India has a long history of people not paying tax (like most developed countries) also the politicians need to make sure they're getting paid by the people who aren't paying tax for not paying tax.
Re: (Score:2)
The headline says "influencers", but the summary quotes the bill as being about people who create "news and current affairs programs". They're not trying to reduce the number of makeup tutorials: they're trying to suppress criticism of the government.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess the plan here is to reduce the amount of content from India and reduce the amount of influence India has in the social space? But why would they want to sacrifice that?
The goal is actually control of whatever message the influencers may be peddling. The fact that clamping down will actually decrease the amount of content probably never occurred to them, or occurred to them only as a positive. They can sponsor those with messages they like, if they want. But no need to worry about people not doing so well financially getting a foothold or an audience developed.
Learning from China (Score:2)
...register with the government, set up a content evaluation committee that checks all content before it is published, and appoint complaint handlers — all at their own expense. Any failures in compliance could lead to criminal charges...
Gotta make sure there's no thoughtcrime coming to the masses. We've always been at war with Islamistan.
Starlink (Score:4, Interesting)
The only solution is Starlink or other satellite megaconstellations like Kuiper and Oneweb. We need a satellite constellation operated by a non-profit organization/foundation dedicated to free speech and telecom for all. Elon if you're reading this, hand over control of Starlink to me so I can operate it in a neutral manner.
Re: (Score:3)
Dude, an internet connection isn't a gun. Let me know how they can DDoS from a satellite connection lol. It'll get throttled ASAP .. it's a phase array antenna .. signals from a particular location can be throttled to 1 Mbps .. which is enough for free speech but not DDoS.
Re: (Score:2)
Command and control easily flow through Starlink.
Re: (Score:3)
For all? So you’re cool with a North Korean free-for-all? Iran? Russia?
Yes. Everyone has a right to speak.
Free high-speed WiFi for every cartel and terrorist group
Who said anything about "free"?
Terrorists should pay for their Internet just like everyone else.
Doesn’t mean handing every man, woman, child, and psychopath a gun
An Internet connection isn't a gun. That's an idiotic analogy.
Hmm, (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
It's socialist in that there is top down economy, and government has strong price controls in place in a lot of fields. It's one of the main reasons why farmers are so unproductive in India relative to what they should be based on soil and general environment quality for example.
It's secular in that technically there's a freedom of religion in state. In practice, it's one of the most religious nations, largely defined by invasion of islam into hindu heartlands. So people overwhelmingly define themselves by
Does India really qualify as a democracy? (Score:2)
...The top party squelches the press by inventing excuses to bust news sources who don't kiss its ass. Voters can't get information on competing candidates, assuming the candidates are not jailed for "corruption". It's hardly more democratic than Russia.
Re: (Score:2)
India is/was a long time ally of Russia/USSR and no wonder the current ruling dispensation is taking a page out of Putin's game book. The current ruling party is opposed to India being a secular state and wants it to be a Hindu state. The opposition is a family run business that hates free trade and wants familial control over all resources, both public and private. The familial matriarch even brought absolutist rule over the country in protest for being voted out by the people. Those are the two sides to c
Freedom of Speech! (Score:2)
... they've heard of it, and don't like it.
Perfect (Score:3)
The fewer influencers, the better. Let them have proper jobs and actually do something beneficial to the society rather than mindlessly promote someone else's content and annoy the hell out of people.
It's all about tax! (Score:2)
Maybe. Or maybe not, as influencers can be also politically active!